FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Jeffrey T. Kriete,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 95-223
Westbrook Inland Wetlands
Commission; Westbrook First
Selectman; Troop F, State of
Connecticut, Department of Public
Safety, Division of State
Police; and Charter Oak Corporation,
Respondents March 27, 1996
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on January 2nd, 1996, at which time the complainant and the respondents
commission, first selectman and department appeared, stipulated to certain
facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The caption of this case was corrected to
reflect the title of the respondent first selectman. Charter Oak Corporation did not appear at the hearing on this
matter, however, prior to the hearing it filed an appearance and indicated that
this Commission did not have jurisdiction over it and that it is an improperly
named respondent.
After consideration of the entire record, the
following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The
respondents commission, first selectman and department are public agencies
within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it is concluded that
Charter Oak Corporation is not a public agency within the meaning of
1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter
of complaint dated July 4, 1995 and filed with the Commission on July 5, 1995,
the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondents
violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by forcefully
removing him from a meeting of the respondent Commission on June 20, 1995.
3. It is
found that on June 20, 1995 the respondent commission held a site inspection at
the site of the factory outlet mall on Flat Rock Road, Westbrook.
Docket #FIC 95-223 Page
2
4. It is
concluded that the site inspection, described in paragraph 3, above, is a
meeting within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S., (hereinafter "site
inspection meeting")
5. It is
found that prior to the site inspection meeting two police officers, responding
to a request made by Charter Oak Corporation, the developers of the mall
project, ordered the complainant not to go onto the property where the site
inspection meeting was being conducted.
6. At the
hearing on this matter, the respondent Commission conceded that it was wrong to
have prohibited the complainant from attending the site inspection meeting on
June 20, 1995.
7. It is
concluded that the respondent Commission violated 1-21(a), G.S. when it
prohibited the complainant from attending the site inspection meeting held on
June 20, 1995.
8. Section
1-21i(b)(2), G.S., permits the imposition of a civil penalty upon a finding
that a denial of any right created under the FOI Act was without reasonable
grounds and after the official directly responsible for such denial has been
given an opportunity to be heard at a hearing.
9. It is
found that the respondent Commission was aware and advised by counsel prior to
the June 20, 1995 site inspection meeting that barring the public from a site
inspection would be a violation of the FOI Act.
10. It is
found that the respondent Commission, nonetheless barred the complainant from
attending the site inspection meeting on June 20, 1995.
11. It is
found that the respondent Commission's action appears to have been without
reasonable grounds.
12. It is
therefore concluded that a further hearing to allow the respondent Commission
an opportunity to show cause why a
civil penalty should not be imposed upon it is warranted pursuant to
1-21i(b)(2), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1. The
respondent Commission shall attend a hearing for the sole purpose to show cause
why a civil penalty should not be imposed upon it for barring the complainant
from attending the June 20, 1995 meeting.
Docket #FIC 95-223 Page
3
2. The
complaint is dismissed as against the respondents first selectman, department
and Charter Oak Corporation.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 27, 1996.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
Docket #FIC 95-223 Page
4
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c),
G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING
ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR
THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED
CASE ARE:
Jeffrey T. Kriete
342 Grove Beach Road
Westbrook, CT 06498
Westbrook Inland Wetlands
Commisssion; Westbrook First Selectman
c/o Richard J. Beatty, Esq.
25 Boston Street
Guilford, CT 06437
Troop F, State of
Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police
c/o Michael J. Lanoue, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
Charter Oak Corporation
c/o Susan A. Manchester, Esq.
1000 Elm Street
P.O. Box 3701
Manchester, NH 03105-3701
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission